GRBP is dead, what now?0 Likes/244 Replies/2955 ViewsMikeWeeks 321 posts
@bigrexxx - "There's already a new game being developed, and it could be revealed as early as this summer."
When did Ubisoft make that announcement?
Folks are posting gaming-industry rumors/leaks on the subject AFAIK.
Exactly, I don't know why people are saying that when officially there is no such announcement?
2 weeks ago (perhaps even 3 or as little as 1) this was just a leak, then a week ago an assumption now is a fact and even more there will be a reveal for the summer????
What in the name of turds Batman, how do we go from a rumor of a leak to an assumption then a fact and now a reveal w/o a single official word? I mean, I understand hope and wish but this is just absurd!
As absurd as the Studio has listened to the eloquent feedback and now is prepare to create the game that we want.
The only thing I need to read now is that people have started to pre-order the game and we will come full circle.
@mikeweeks Well I think that most people fully expect that a new game was in development, but if the leaks are true, it could release as early as Fiscal Year 2023. So depending on how Ubisoft defines their fiscal years, we could already be in FY2023, or it could start next April 1st. So if the plan could be to release it sometime in the Spring or Summer of next year, an official announcement in the next few months would not be unheard of. Just because Breakpoints release schedule was so truncated, doesn't mean that will happen for every Ghost Recon title going forward
MikeWeeks 321 posts
@bigrexxx -- Something along the lines of "There's reportedly a new game ..." would appear to be much more accurate imo, and frankly wouldn't even have caught my eye.
Given there's no announcement from Ubisoft on the subject, I simply remain confused by the wording used, that's all.
AvengerGR35 67 posts
@virtual-chris Indeed a setting in Afghanistan would be perfect. The next game could serve as a prequel to BP since Nomad, Walker and Hill took part in some operations there and specifically in Kandahar a few years before the events of BP.
On another note, MGS V features a big part of the 80s Kabul but since the FOX engine sacrifices number of present population for the sake of performance, the map is mostly empty in between guard posts and outposts, apart from some trucks and random foot patrols going back and forth between bases. Not to mention the only Mujahedeen rebels you encounter are POWs. It would've been great if a rebel faction existed in the game and had random firefights with the Soviets. It would make the map feel more alive.
@mikeweeks Well according to that Kotaku article, the writer had 2 different sources that confirmed the existence of the game, (which confirmed the previous Nvidia leak last year), and that Ubi contemplated teasing it at their 20th anniversary event, but chose to reveal Frontline instead. So this isn't just some random kid on Twitter or Reddit pulling stuff out of thin air. But if you want to wait until there's an official announcement, before you'll believe that a new game is in the works, then that's your choice.
From what I understand, "2 sources told Kotaku". 2 sources to only 1 media, it is a but light in my opinion, to consider it true, though.
Personnally, I wish to believe it's happening and I hope that somehow our feedback will be taken in account (@FcAc-No-Moe will most than certainly disagree).
Anyhow, it doesn't mean we still can't discuss
@AvengerGR35 The game could be on Ubikhistan for all I care, as long as it is a ground & mature and it makes sense from what has been asked, I am going to be ok.
@bigrexxx Of course I will disagree. We can discuss it of course but let not place dates as facts already because even if it was a leak by Nvidia, there is no proof that the leak came from Ubi. I mean, it could very well be, don't get me wrong, their vision is so blurry that this could very well be their new marketing strategy and save even more money this way but, until there is an official announcement, I like to keep my reservation at whatever people are saying.
There were talks that all Wildlands needed to become a proper Ghost Recon game was a few easy tweaks here and there making it seemed like at some point there were coming and well... 3+ years later there is no such thing so this is why I rather not believe is Non-Official announcement.
@fcac-no-moe I never said that any specific timeline is a fact, outside of what the article claimed. That being that the game COULD be released as early as FY2023. So if true, saying that it COULD also be announced this summer is no more absurd than voicing an opinion about whether it's going to us an open world map or not. As far as where the leaks came from, there were several studios involved in creating Breakpoint and likely the next game as well, with several hundred employees, and any one of them could have leaked the info to Kotaku. They don't even have to be working on the game directly to know about it. For example, I'm sure that even the team working on Just Dance, at Ubisoft Paris, knows what other games are being worked on within the studio. just like my daughter, who works in an animation studio, making cartoons for TV instead of video games, knows what other projects her coworkers are working on, long before there was any kind of public announcements.
Well sure and this new AAA game could also finally be a mature and grounded. Wildlands could also received the little tweaks needed to become a proper GR game meanwhile. Flatline could have been pulled because UBI listened to the community as opposed of Reacting to the Shellacking, hence, why it was pulled. I could go on but... why?
You are right though, it does provide a discussion in this ghost town forum, that is for sure.
AI.BLUEFOX 212 posts
Assuming there is a new GR game in development is probably a safe bet. When hasn't there been? Potentially a gap after GRAW 2, but that is about the only time when there hasn't been a game in the works.
Assuming the Nvidia leak with "over" in the description could be the codename for the project? Maybe, maybe not; it could easily have been a tag that was added to indicate new development on Breakpoint is over - something now confirmed. I think it is more likely that it is the code name, but we're all guessing.
One thing is for sure, this is the time we can probably best influence the decisions in the game. It would be a massive improvement if the community could feel engaged and involved in that feedback and made to feel valued for it. That can start by opening up a two way dialogue.
Speaking of best time to influence the game... has Delta being called to look, participate, test or give feedback yet? Because if it hasn't, I doubt us peasants will have much opportunity to influence much of nothing.
Well, that is not entirely true unless of course they comeback with the innovative idea that this new AAA game will not have Teammates.
@ai-bluefox I believe you're right that this period should be used by the community to voice his excpectations for the a futur Ghost Recon. But @FcAc-No-Moe has a point, and our past experience between GRW and GRBP has shown that our influence is fairly limited. Even Delta company's influence was for GRBP.
In your opinion, what can we do to be heard? I have personnally some doubts that writting wishing lists on the forum has bearly any incidence on the game developpment.
Seriously and honestly, how many an eloquent post have we seen here and let alone in the old forum (which it will be the excuse as to the why they need our feedback now, bookmark this post) on how the next game should be?
The same simple reason we are at each other's throats right now is because we are just talking to ourselves and there is not even an echo to speak off.
Without a two way dialogue like Blue eloquently wrote, and not from Him or any other CM here (no insult whatsoever) but from someone in the Studio that can come here and man up about it, we will continue to just have a place to bicker about it and make things even harder for them to see what we want but in the end, and as always, it will be their fault.
I also have a funny feeling that this is what they want so they can have the excuse that the feedback is not clear or hard to get to.
I think our feedback is one of many that they look at, and we're not the most relevant metric.
The only reason I even have a passing interest in what might be coming, is because of The Ghost Experience. I didn't love Wildlands, and I hated the Breakpoint Beta. I basically wrote Ghost Recon off at that point. But the Ghost Experience showed Ubi Paris still has talent, and might [big IF style MIGHT], be able to thread the needle moving forward. Wasn't perfect in Breakpoint, but it turned the game around and showed promise.
Clearly Ubisoft is an Arcade First Publisher. They've been moving that way for commercial reasons for over a decade. All of their franchises have been watered down in the pursuit of growing market share - I vociferously disagree with their approach, but I understand why they did it. Ubisoft has too much creative influence over their Studios, in my opinion, but then it's not my money that is being affected.
The Ghost Experience has the potential to allow them to serve both markets with one game. The question is if they have the vision and green light to do so. They could easily push back toward a more realistic experience, and then just give folks the option to turn it off and Arcade/Rambo away if they wish. If they do? Great, I might even preorder if the Beta is fun and promising! If they don't? I just won't buy it, and it might finally give me the push to try Arma or I'll start bugging the Sandstorm folks to improve the PvE part of their game.
Well, I agree to disagree, personally speaking the Ghost Experience was nothing more than removing the Gear Score from the core of the game but we still have the worse Enemy and AI Teammate in history and to date. The other improvements, if it had any, were minimalistic and not immersive enough for me to value it as an effort or showed more promise.
Oh and I have ZERO doubt that the Studio has talent, I know perfectly well that THEY DO, the problem is that they lack the spine and the pride to SHOW IT, hence why we have not seen decent and proper GR game. Is this due to them or Ubi? I don't know and realistically speaking I don't care, they need to fix their internal situation and don't ask me to pay full price while they do.
I don't know about you and many here but I am looking to play a shooter where killing is easy but because I have used my head, I have made a good plan and I have acted accordingly and not because the enemy is a paper target with eagle eye accuracy that I can bamboozle easily if I just shoot and move, rinse and repeat until they are all down.
@fcac-no-moe we have the same desire, I've just been more forgiving because I believe the PS4/XBOne are a bigger impediment to the AI than you and others [based on Ubi forcing them to use up threads for more polygons and the drones].
All I want in this world is a deadly shooter where difficulty is due to the tactics of the AI, preferably with the option for some Urban combat.
Maybe someone in this upcoming generation finally delivers, as long as we can hold off 8K for a good chunk of time.
Virtual-Chris 805 posts
I think one of the reasons the AI in TD2 is among the best I've played against, is because all the AI logic is done server-side. Of course there are other aspects that probably make the AI in TD better, such as having less open space to have to accommodate in the pathing and no concept of stealth/detection that dramatically simplifies enemy response. But if online only games are a thing, they can bring a lot of added compute power to consoles. Its possible even today, that the console could simply become a rendering machine with all the game's core logic hosted server-side.
@virtual-chris Ubisoft announced a new tech called Scalar. This was developed in Sweden, where Massive also happens to be. Not too hard to surmise that Scalar is built off the ground work that Massive did with TD1 & TD2.
Scalar does exactly what you mentioned, moving the persistent game world to the cloud. This theoretically eliminates a big chunk of the user hardware limits, allows the Devs to update some things without requiring large downloads [or downtime], and let's them use the scaling power of the cloud to beef up their worlds and NPCs.
Granted, it also is basically the ultimate DRM, and would require a stable internet connection for you to be able to play.
Remains to be seen if it actually works in practice. I also wonder if Snowdrop is just a better engine than Anvil for AI.